All Female Shortlists?

[mushroom25]

setting aside for the moment any arguments that single interest shortlists of any description invite accusations of discrimination - given that expected rule changes (allowing transgenders access to all-female shortlists, and allowing transgenders to self-identify) could (in theory, allegedly) see men included on all-female shortlists:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5666983/Three-women-set-quit-Labour-party-decision-allow-transgender.html
are the activists highlighted correct in their assertion that labour takes x-x human beings too much for granted? or are the party well rid of individuals that subscribe to such narrow mindedness?

[bednobs]

sorry mush, i found your question difficult to follow and im not exactly sure what you are asking

[jim360]

"Does allowing self-identifying transwomen on all-women shortlists undermine 'natural' (XX) women? Or is it narrow-minded to think of see things that way?"

[mushroom25]

thank you Jim. :-)

[ToraToraTora]

yes

[jim360]

Welcome, mushroom, although I still had a small typo in my last post ("think of see" should be either "think of" or "see").

Don't have an answer, by the way.

[whiskeryron]

When oh when are politicians going to stop meddling ? Its getting to the point where I cannot follow the changes thrust upon us.

[naomi24]

Allowing men who choose to identify as women on to all women short lists renders the list a nonsense. (I don't agree with 'all men' or 'all women' or 'all black' or 'all white' - not that I've ever come across the latter - shortlists anyway).

[Spicerack]

All this 'progressive' liberal guff was bound to turn and bite itself on the ***.
We see it happening more and more lately. I enjoy it.

[Old_Geezer]

Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we opt to include everyone regardless whether it makes sense or not. (I'll work on the spanning; and the rhyming.)

We should have short folk shortlists, with candidates that self-identify as short. There's not enough short people in government.